Originally Posted by charliedontsurf334
I am no lawyer. So could someone explain to me why overturning the Assault Weapons Ban would need strict scrutiny?
It is no more logical than the Safe Handgun Certificate, and under intermediate scrutiny, I do not see any "compelling interest" in banning them. As the NRA and every other gun rights group has been saying since 1993, "They are functionally no different than non-banned guns."
I misspoke - intermediate should be fine on that, as well. What I was intending to say is that we should settle the scrutiny question, first, rather than trying to argue both of them, at once.
: I updated the above to not say we need "strict" scrutiny.